Laserfiche WebLink
1.1.2.1 & 2.5.2 <br />These paragraphs relate to the Architect's performance with respect to the schedule. I'm <br />sure you've had discussions relating to performance and the schedule. We would <br />typically, particularly with the nature of this project, strengthen this language to establish <br />the Architect's failure to meet schedule as a material breach of contract. I would <br />anticipate a good deal of resistance to such a proposal, and the current language might <br />have to suffice. <br />2.4.4 <br />This paragraph indicates that the architect is only responsible for "assisting the owner in <br />connection with the Owner's responsibility for filing documents. ...". We would change <br />this so the azchitect would have the primary responsibility for obtaining required permits. <br />For example, "Architect shall be responsible for applying for and assisting Owner in <br />obtaining all required government approvals." <br />2.4.5 <br />If the County or Transit has a preferred format for the CAD records, that should be <br />specified in this paragraph. Additionally, it would be highly desirable for the County and <br />Transit to have a record set of CAD as-built drawings. As the contract is currently <br />written, this service is not in the base contract, but is considered Optional Additional <br />Services in pa.ragraph 3.4.16. Depending on our bargaining position, we would try to <br />negotiate to have this service included in the base contract for a modest charge. <br />2.4.7 <br />This appears to be old language based on the previous negotiated-contract <br />approach. Rather than having the architect "work cooperatively with the Contractor.. ." <br />we might substitute " work cooperatively with the Owner and the Owner's <br />consultants. . . .". <br />2.6.1 <br />The County and Transit may want to e~end the Architect's window of responsibility to <br />75 days after the date of Substantial Completion. This would cover the 75-day <br />subcontractor lien period. This is not a critical point, but adds a little piece of mind. <br />2.6.4 <br />We would ask that the "Architect advise and consult with the Owner..." through the <br />period determined in paragraph 2.6.1. <br />2.6.18 & 2.6.19 <br />It appears that the intent of this contract is for the Architect to make recommendations <br />rather than decisions. In view of that approach, these two paragraphs should be revised <br />to reference "recommendations" of the Architect rather than "decisions"_ <br />3.1.1 <br />~ <br />